>>3262585>larger sensor doesn't mean sharperIf you use the same lens, and the lens covers the image circle, and both images are viewed at the same size then yes, larger sensor = sharper image.
>low light wahhhsStop saying generalities don't have exclusions, yes i could compare an 8 year old canon ff to the latest sony crop and show less noise from sony in the dark. If you push a nissan micra off a cliff it can do 0-60 in 3 seconds.
>lensesWhy you buying expensive ff lenses when the cheapest image quality upgrade is to go ff in the first place? To go back to bad car analogies, you would be dumb to send your stock $10k nissan micra to the garage to spend the same as the car cost again to give it 10 extra bhp.
>when they cost moreYou're a dumb cunt, anyone with half a brain cell to flick into action would realise i was talking about percentages. None of my ff lenses have lost more than 10% since i got them, some have increased in value, even going from new to 2nd hand. Crop lenses tend to lose 1/3 coming of their boxes and another 1/3 over about 5 years.
>function of the lensYes, longer fl is easier to make smoother bokeh, bigger sensor = longer fl =smoother bokeh.
>better howBecause as above, bigger sensor = longer fl = easier to make. Ideally lenses are symmetrical designs, which means the fl = distance from sensor to objective lens. So if you want a 24mm lens, you can do that easily on ff, because the flange of sony e mount at least is shorter, but you'd need a 16mm lens for the crop equivalent, which would necessitate a retrofocal section.
Glad i could help.
